woo hoo! good guys won one. Illinios Concealed Carry info

[drewtam]

In reality, the court has effectively already mandated "Constitutional carry" if the legislature doesn't write an acceptable law within 180 days. The current law has been ruled unconstitutional, with a stay of 180 days. That means as of 181 days, the current law ceases to apply and does not have any validity. Remember, the general principle is that if a law doesn't say something is NOT legal ... it's legal.

The Illinois state constitution says:

"Subject only to the police power" means subject to the power of the legislature to write a law regulating it. Otherwise, the right CANNOT be infringed. So if there's no replacement law after 180 days, Illinois defaults to Constitutional carry automatically. ( I think ... IANAL).

Whats exciting about this possibility is that we almost got CCW by democracy, it failed by a 65-32 vote. Therefore, a majority contingent should be able to hold out for a decent law or force constitution carry.

[Strings]

>"Subject only to the police power" means subject to the power of the legislature to write a law regulating it. Otherwise, the right CANNOT be infringed. So if there's no replacement law after 180 days, Illinois defaults to Constitutional carry automatically. ( I think ... IANAL).<

The problem here is, how will the police and DA's deal with the situation.

Here in WI, we had the AG send an open letter to county prosecuters, telling them that open carry was legal. And we still had cops busting people for it (using charges like "disturbing the peace)

[lupinus]

That would be one hell of an amusing turn of events

[geronimotwo]

first, woohoo for those in IL!!

second, if they pass a law that seems overly restrictive, will it take another court case to overturn it?

[Scout26]

first, woohoo for those in IL!!

second, if they pass a law that seems overly restrictive, will it take another court case to overturn it?

Chicago tried that with it's first handgun permit law.  It required that one getting a set number of hours of training on a shooting range, then banned all shooting ranges within the city limits as being "too dangerous".  The Seventh Circuit told the city they "were being too cute by half" and bitch-slapped the city in the Ezell ruling.  It stated that the closer an activity gets to the fundamental right the stricter the scrutiny.  Another huge loss for the anti's.

So the Seventh Circuit isn't going to put up with any BS from the state.  If the state tries to be "too cute by half" the court may strike down the law and "Hellooooo Constitutional Carry !!!!"

[Kingcreek]

The Chicago antis are scrambling to hold on to some of their precious restrictions but it ain't gonna work this time. We are now on offense and we don't have to play nice. F them.

[longeyes]

Well, let's hope we get universal concealed carry before handguns are banned altogether to bring us into conformity with most of the "civilized" world.

[gunsmith]

from the news according to gunsmith

Illinois has declared the ban  carrying a gun unconstitutional.
When asked about his home State abiding by the Constitution, Obama replied "Indonesia doesn't have to follow USA's laws"

[kgbsquirrel]

from the news according to gunsmith

Illinois has declared the ban  carrying a gun unconstitutional.
When asked about his home State abiding by the Constitution, Obama replied "Indonesia doesn't have to follow USA's laws"

The Onion Gunsmith? 

[slingshot]

From the Chicago Tribune article;

Mayor Rahm Emanuel said through a spokesman that he was “disappointed with the court’s decision.” The city is reviewing the opinion and will work with others “to best protect the residents of Chicago and still meet constitutional restrictions,” Bill McCaffrey added.

“As the mayor has said all along, the City of Chicago is committed to maintaining the fullest degree of lawful handgun restrictions possible while still respecting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens, because maintaining common-sense restrictions is an issue of public safety.”

Guess we will have to wait to see what Chicago does.  They clearly have a (gang) crime problem, and have not been able to come close to solving it.  Concealed carry is the answer.

Maybe in 4 years when the President moves back, he can community organize again like Jimmy Carter builds houses.  I bet the Obama and Emanuel houses will be well protected.  Shouldn't everyone have the same right?

[cosine]

Mayor Rahm Emanuel said through a spokesman that he was “disappointed with the court’s decision.” The city is reviewing the opinion and will work with others “to best protect the residents of Chicago and still meet constitutional restrictions,” Bill McCaffrey added.

“As the mayor has said all along, the City of Chicago is committed to maintaining the fullest degree of lawful handgun restrictions possible while still respecting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens, because maintaining common-sense restrictions is an issue of public safety.”

 

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria)

[Perd Hapley]

Dear Illinois,

You already have an FOID system in place. Now pass a law stating that it allows concealed carry. See? Was it really that hard?

Sincerely,
Bemused Missourian

[Perd Hapley]

Dear Illinois,

You'd better sit down. This is you, in 25 years.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/12/us-usa-florida-guns-idUSBRE8BB1SR20121212?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22

Sincerely,
Bemused Missourian

[geronimotwo]

From the Chicago Tribune article;

Guess we will have to wait to see what Chicago does.  They clearly have a (gang) crime problem, and have not been able to come close to solving it.  Concealed carry is the answer.

Maybe in 4 years when the President moves back, he can community organize again like Jimmy Carter builds houses.  I bet the Obama and Emanuel houses will be well protected.  Shouldn't everyone have the same right?

[drewtam]

From the Chicago Tribune article;

Guess we will have to wait to see what Chicago does.  They clearly have a (gang) crime problem, and have not been able to come close to solving it.  Concealed carry is the answer.

Maybe in 4 years when the President moves back, he can community organize again like Jimmy Carter builds houses.  I bet the Obama and Emanuel houses will be well protected.  Shouldn't everyone have the same right?

I am excited too, but lets be realistic, concealed carry will not solve the gang problems. Look at florida, highest per capita ccw and that doesn't stop the gang areas.

It might be solved with a combination of neighborhood guard (volunteer teams of armed neighbors publicly on watch on every street corner where drugs are sold, or druggies hang out; combined with quick reaction teams- battle rifle armed and quasi-hidden at home ready to support the street teams) + CCW + soft to medium drug legalization. Cutting off welfare/child support may play a part, but I haven't checked the data to be sure.

Cut off the supply chain (drug profits) and confront directly with superior firepower.

The streets were conquered by thugs using violence, they will only be retaken with public display of violence. Cops may or may not be helpful since they are on the cut and haven't done a thing about it. My guess is that they would resist this idea as it becomes more successful.

[slingshot]

I don't expect concealed carry permit availbility to solve the crime problem.  But it might just save some lives and people may have a fighting chance if they are willing to take it.  Feeling empowered is important.

I frankly am more interested in what the State and City of Chicago come up with.  They already have the FOID system and whatever comes next will build on that.  I would guess it will be something along the lines of the DC or NYC laws which make concealed carry permits very selective and difficult to get as I understand it.

I chuckle when I saw the union folks beating on that reporter in MI (Detroit I believe).  What would have happened if the reported pulled out a gun as if I were him, I would be in fear of my life.  Probably wouldn't have a reload with me however and judging by the situation, a reload might come in handy.  From my point of view, there is no need to "dook it out like men".

[longeyes]

A whiff of realism.

[drewtam]

I don't expect concealed carry permit availbility to solve the crime problem.  But it might just save some lives and people may have a fighting chance if they are willing to take it.  Feeling empowered is important.

I frankly am more interested in what the State and City of Chicago come up with.  They already have the FOID system and whatever comes next will build on that.  I would guess it will be something along the lines of the DC or NYC laws which make concealed carry permits very selective and difficult to get as I understand it.

I chuckle when I saw the union folks beating on that reporter in MI (Detroit I believe).  What would have happened if the reported pulled out a gun as if I were him, I would be in fear of my life.  Probably wouldn't have a reload with me however and judging by the situation, a reload might come in handy.  From my point of view, there is no need to "dook it out like men".

Lansing (the capital)

And some of the AFP (americans for prosperity) people were armed; I guess they decided not to escalate.

[Balog]

Lansing (the capital)

And some of the AFP (americans for prosperity) people were armed; I guess they decided not to escalate.

Crowder is also a pretty accomplished MMA guy from what I understand. I imagine if he'd wanted to beat Fatty McUnion's ass into the ground he would have.

[vaskidmark]

Never mind - I goofed and read the wrong bill.

stay safe.

[zahc]

So, most shall-issue permit systems allow a certain amount of time for the issuer to issue the permit, like 90 days. So does that mean IL has 180 days to pass a law, or that they have only 90 days + a 90 day issuing period?

Also, what the hell is this about the 180 days, anyway? It's ok for something to be unconstitutional for 180 days? Is there any precendent whatsoever of a law being found unconstitutional but NOT being struck down?

"Oh, this law is unconstitutional, but I mean, look, we all know that 'unconstitutional' is the new 'constitutional', so like, you should probably get around to changing your law at your convenience; it's ok in the meantime." Wha?

[AZRedhawk44]

Also, what the hell is this about the 180 days, anyway? It's ok for something to be unconstitutional for 180 days? Is there any precendent whatsoever of a law being found unconstitutional but NOT being struck down?

"Oh, this law is unconstitutional, but I mean, look, we all know that 'unconstitutional' is the new 'constitutional', so like, you should probably get around to changing your law at your convenience; it's ok in the meantime." Wha?

I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

[Perd Hapley]

Nobody's added to this thread since Mr. Sicko-pants ran amok in Connecticut.

What do you all think will happen here?

[kgbsquirrel]

Wait and see. 

[T.O.M.]

I'm waiting to see how soon Illinois jumps on the New York model...